Hi Henning,
I cannot give responsible answers, these are merely my personal
opinions.
On Fri, 30 Apr 1999 17:12:56 +0200
Henning Timcke <henning.timcke@werft22.com> wrote:
> From your point of view, who should take care of your considerations ?
To incorporate Philipp's idea into XML spec, some group or person must
propose it to the XML Syntax WG. I don't know who should do that. SYMM
WG or Philipp? If the WG accept the proposal, they will discuss about
it, and finally it goes through (or is killed).
> And: how much additional work has to be done to meet your expectations ?
The notion of SMIL validity is more than XML validity. To express
the correct SMIL constraints, we should have more syntactical
facilities -- context sensitive content model (e.g. <switch>) is needed
as I mentioned, data-typing of attribute value (e.g. "begin" as a clock
value) is also required. I believe the XML Schema WG will work out
the issues. By when? ... I cannot forecast.
Thank you,
--
HIYAMA Masayuki <hiyama@glocom.ac.jp>